Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
The new Parliament
access_time 25 Sep 2023 11:49 AM GMT
Amid India-Canada diplomatic row
access_time 22 Sep 2023 4:00 AM GMT
K Radhakrishnan
access_time 21 Sep 2023 4:00 AM GMT
Womens quota in legislatures
access_time 20 Sep 2023 5:24 AM GMT
Extended Congress CWC meet raises hopes
access_time 19 Sep 2023 5:11 AM GMT
Schools breeding hatred
access_time 14 Sep 2023 10:37 AM GMT
access_time 16 Aug 2023 5:46 AM GMT
Remembering the Teachers
access_time 5 Sep 2023 6:24 AM GMT
Homechevron_rightKeralachevron_rightHC stays vigilance...

HC stays vigilance court order on elevation of Shanker Reddy IPS

HC stays vigilance court order on elevation of Shanker Reddy IPS

Kochi: The High Court Wednesday stayed the proceedings in a vigilance court against the previous UDF government's decision to promote IPS officer N Shanker Reddy to DGP rank and appoint him as the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau.

Justice P Ubaid granted the stay while considering a petition by Congress leader Ramesh Chennithala, who was the then Home Minister when the appointment was made, challenging the 'quick verification' ordered by the vigilance court in Thiruvananthapuram.

Chennithala, who is at present the Leader of the Opposition in the assembly, has submitted that granting of promotion to the officer was legal and the state government had the authority to do so.

In the previous hearing, the high court had rapped the VACB and directed it to "explain" its authority to "comment on or direct" the government to review its administrative decisions and actions.

Considering another case filed by former finance minister K M Mani, seeking to quash a vigilance probe into bar bribery case, the high court criticised the 'inefficiency and irresponsibility' of the officer who filed two statements regarding the investigation in the court.

In the last hearing, the court had directed the VACB to file a proper statement with definite fact regarding the investigation.

When the matter came up today, a new special prosecutor filed one statement, and the state prosecutor filed another statement.

The court asked whether its consent was obtained for appointment of special prosecutor in the case.

It then directed that the government should have a definite stand as to who should prosecute the case and adjourned the matter to March 27.

Show Full Article
Next Story